You'd think that I would eventually begin to take it as a matter of
course that a WaToToM gathering would be exciting and productive and a
lot of fun, but there is no evidence to support that theory. I'm now
back from WaToToM #9, and just as astounded and exhilarated as I was
the previous eight times. This has in part to do with where we were --
the Sleeping Lady Resort and Conference Center, with picture post-card
snow under sparkling blue skies -- but much more to do with who we
were. There was no one there who did not have a profound interest
in mathematics, the teaching of mathematics and the teaching of the
teachers of mathematics. We are pursuing that interest in ways that are
related but by no means identical, so we all have a lot to learn from
each other. And we are all working in the context of the education
system of the state of Washington, so we all have an interest in
finding out as much as we can about that system, not to mention
influencing it when appropriate and possible. Sometimes, in fact, the
interest extends to influencing it even when it is not so possible, but
we'll try anyway. It's a heady combination!
On to details. Once again we had a wonderful spread
of participants -- UW (Mathematics, Education, GK-12 Project and the
Bothell campus), WSU, Eastern, Central (two campuses), Western, Seattle
U, PLU, and a trio of community colleges, one from each of the three
parts of the state. We even almost had someone from Wyoming, partly
because of his interest in producing a WyToToM. Unfortunately, just
short of the airport he had a close encounter of the unpleasant kind
with a deer on the highway. Pete, thank goodness, was undamaged, but
the same cannot be said of his car or his travel plans. Fortunately,
the rest of us had no such encounters, so we arrived at the time of
introductions full of enthusiasm and dinner. Everyone succeeded in
finding someone they didn't know, so they could introduce each other,
and around we went. Very effective way to learn what a great bunch we
were.
That was Friday evening, and we ended pretty early
to fortify ourselves for a very big Saturday. Saturday started off with
a warm-up game that would also have served as an ice-breaker if there
had been any ice to break. It was a trial run for a game I plan to run
at the teachers' lunch on Math Day, and very helpful the trial was --
let's just hope I don't replace the obscurities that got eliminated
from the directions with further obscurities. Then we progressed to the
serious business of the day, and thereby hangs a tale.
When I first launched the harebrained scheme of
getting folks from all over the state to get together just because they
shared an interest in educating teachers, a number of people asked the
highly reasonable question "What's your goal in doing this? What do you
expect to come of it?" And all I could reply was "When people have that
much in common, they need to be able to talk with each other." And
indeed, meeting that need proved to be both satisfying and worthwhile
for a couple of years. Then we got to be sufficiently well settled in
and acquainted with each other to recognize that there were some issues
on which we shared strong views and about which we wanted to take
action. The question was what action, and how to take it. At this
stage, through a combination of organizational glitches and sheer bad
luck, we were going through a period of having no representation from
OSPI (the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction), so we
were short on guidance. As a result, we spent a few years producing
carefully honed position papers that we fired off in the general
direction of OSPI or the HEC (Higher Education Coordinating) board,
with remarkably little apparent result. Some weren't even acknowledged.
Four years ago, finally, we succeeded in bringing Bob McIntosh from
OSPI to a gathering, and things began to turn around. Our letters and
their direction got more focused. Even at that, though, it was a while
before we had any evidence of improvement. Then in the summer of '04 we
had a break-through. I got a letter indicating that the Professional
Educator Standards Board (PESB) was having a meeting at which they
would like to have WaToToM's opinion given -- would I come and give it?
I would, of course, with bells on! I wasn't convinced of the impact of
what I said, but the fact of being invited was terrific. Long months
passed, increasing my doubts about whether I had accomplished anything.
Then last September I got a note from one Larry Lashway, who was
organizing a meeting sponsored by the PESB to discuss the requirements
for endorsements in mathematics at the elementary, middle and high
school levels. He asked WaToToM to recommend people to take part in the
discussion. Three other WaToToMites and I turned up for what proved to
be a really exciting day. This was not a pro forma request -- they
really wanted our views, and boy! did they get them! By the end of the
day, we had put together a draft document that pleased all of us.
Since then Larry has taken that draft, formalized it a bit, and run it
past a number of relevant committees. It seems to be surviving pretty
much intact.
Saturday morning of WaToToM, Larry brought in the
current version of that draft, explained its origins and status to all
present and gave us all another chance at some input. Sunday morning he
broadened the picture a bit and discussed more about its setting and
its future (hoped for) impact. Some issues are way beyond our power to
have much influence -- for instance, the fact that currently the state
has two endorsements, one for K-8 and one for 5-12, leaving middle
school, whose needs definitely do not match those of either elementary
or high school, as a perennial step child. On the other hand, part of
the enforcement for any such requirement is a test, and that test (or
rather, those tests) will begin to be designed as soon as the
endorsement requirements are passed. There we very much hope to have
some influence, so we will watch, hawk-like, for the right moment to
volunteer our assistance. It's a far cry from firing position papers
into the void!
The last bit of Saturday morning was a different
update, Bill Moore, who heads up the Transition Math Project came in to
discuss some of the progress it has made, and its hopes and plans. That
one deals with the transition from high school to college, currently a
source of a fair amount of discomfort. Distressingly many a newly
hatched high school graduate winds up in what used to be called
remedial and is now called a developmental courses, whether at a
community college or a four-year one. Not a healthy state of affairs,
either for the students or the colleges. Much good work by a multitude
of people has gone into shaping a document describing the mathematical
desiderata for an incoming freshman, and much more work will be going
into helping them be met.
Saturday afternoon, after all of us had spent a
couple of hours appreciating our glorious surroundings and/or talking,
working or snoozing, we reconvened for the session that has always been
the heart of a WaToToM gathering: the teacher session. In past years we
have shifted from level to level, and mixed urban and suburban
experiences, but since all of the teachers were within my
particular sphere, we have completely lacked the rural point of view,
or in fact any teaching perspective from east of the mountains. To
offset this, I cheerfully accepted an offer from Kim Vincent at WSU to
find this year's teachers. Delegating proved to have been an excellent
plan, as Kim came up with a fine panel of middle school teachers. One
was from Pullman (experience not unlike a school close to UW, only not
so massive), and the other two from rural schools, one small and one
tiny. We saw some of the advantages -- the tiny school has a really
cohesive faculty -- and disadvantages. In the latter category it seemed
to me that there was a lot of similarity with some of the urban
schools: poverty and a huge population turnover resulting from (in
their case) migrant worker families. They're not even immune from gang
problems. At one of the schools some of the problems were, in fact,
horrific (teacher forbidden to trap a mouse or pick up its droppings
for fear of offending the exterminators or the custodian), which
brought into sharp focus another aspect of this particular panel: for
the first time we had a panel consisting of teachers new to the
classroom. They are bright, energetic and dedicated -- exactly what the
teaching profession needs. I would bet that this particular threesome
will have the tenacity to continue in the classroom, but it's awfully
easy to see why others who also have a lot to offer burn out or just
plain collapse under what they are put through.
Saturday evening had no such worrisome overtones.
That was the time for sitting around discussing what was new at each of
our places since last WaToToM. Huge amounts all over the state. Enough
to make you stand up and cheer even before contrasting it with what we
had to say eight years ago. And way too much to give in any kind of
detail here, so I will just say that exciting things are happening at
two-, four- and more-year institutions in every part of the state.
Sunday morning we have usually spent wondering about
which issue there was worth throwing ourselves into. This time it was
clear, so after plotting a bit about next year's WaToToM gathering we
turned the floor back over to Larry Lashway and worked on gearing
ourselves up for endorsements and beyond. After which we geared
ourselves up to take in one more splendid meal, reluctantly parted
company and headed out into the sparkling sunshine to return to our
highly varied destinations.
Next year's WaToToM's tenth. I think we need gold stars for our name tags!